Attacks and interference with personnel working in the public domain, in particular locations where money is exchanged and/or valuable goods are held in storage, are becoming increasingly frequent. Such personnel are often, by necessity, exposed to public contact in order to conduct necessary day to day business. In order to address such concerns a wide range of security products are available to reduce or minimise such risks. Such security products include alarm systems, surveillance cameras anti-jump barriers, static guards, fixed glazing and rising security screens. However, all the currently available security products suffer from various limitations or disadvantages.
For example, alarm systems, whilst offering a form of deterrence, are designed primarily as a call for assistance and will not necessarily actively deter an intruder or prevent an assault on personnel. Similarly, surveillance cameras record events and offer a limited amount of deterrence, but do not provide any physical barrier to physical violence. Anti-jump barriers provide a measure of protection, but cause interference in the day to day activities of personnel dealing with the public and are not yet socially acceptable aesthetically in many areas of the public domain. Static guards and fixed glazing panels provide a measure of deterrence, but are expensive to install, have a tendency to inhibit a friendly and free trading environment and restrict communication by putting a permanent barrier between the working personnel and the consuming public. Such difficulties are exacerbated when transfer of goods and monies between personnel and the public is involved. Rising screens are effective security devices and operate by providing an anti-ballistic steel screen between the working personnel and the consuming public. Such screens are highly expensive and dedicated pieces of equipment powered by highly sophisticated pneumatics and require dedicated installation in a working environment at considerable expense. Whilst such rising screens are highly effective and efficient, their cost and the high level of engineering required for operation, necessitating dedicated installation, renders them suitable only for very high risk environments including banks and credit unions where the high cost of installation can be justified including incorporation into counter refitting and overall design. Such systems are generally prohibitive for the average trader and in fact, generally only justifiable in situations where armed robbery or hold-ups involving guns and other forms of mortal threat to personnel are involved.
In general trading situations, other than the previously mentioned high-risk situations, a need exists for protection of personnel against physical attacks and threats including knife and syringe attacks and threats of physical violence by aggressive members of the public. In particular, an intermediate level of protection against such violence needs to be available in a cost effective and efficient manner without resorting to fitting of bullet proof security screens as part of a dedicated trading environment design. Such a security product would not necessarily have to be bullet proof, but should provide an immediately implemental interference between the operating personnel and an aggressive member of the public. Furthermore, such a protective system would preferably be adapted for retro-fitting to existing trading environments with minimal retro-fitting cost.